Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Recommended Posts

Posted

i was a bit surprised by the proliferation of starbucks in london, but i was also grateful for it within the first couple days of my arrival--nothing kicks jet lag like a cup of charbucks.

Posted (edited)
What is with you; are a shop designer or something, why must the genetive apostrophe always be left out of shop names?

I assume you mean the genitive apostrophe

Such pedantry.

although 'possessive' is the usual term.

There are only two cases left in Modern English: a common case where the noun has no ending at all, and the genitive. The genitive is formed by adding an-s to the singular form of the noun. In writing, this appears with a preceding apostrophe.

How about: because it's not in the name of the store?

Woolworths (founded by a Mr Woolworth)

Boots

Dixons

Rumbelows

Starbucks

No genitive apostrophes.

Edited by Lord Michael Lewis (log)
Posted
Starbucks does better coffee that the Fat Duck  :biggrin:

ps. will a mod please remove Michael's erroneous apostrophe from the thread title? thanks

What is with you; are a shop designer or something, why must the genetive apostrophe always be left out of shop names?

It makes my blood boil!

I know what you mean. I feel the same about the missing apostrophe in Toms River NJ.

To cheer you up, perhaps - while my business's name does not require an apostrophe it is properly punctuated: Can Do!

Holly Moore

"I eat, therefore I am."

HollyEats.Com

Twitter

Posted
A macchiato is not supposed to have caramel syrup in it.  :angry:

For reasons I still do not fully comprehend, I ordered one of those a few weeks ago. It was the worst coffee-based drink I have ever had. It was sickeningly sweet, and other than that the only recognizable flavor was one like the smell of that high school science experiment where you pour hydrochloric acid over sugar and it burns and bubbles up out of the beaker.

Chief Scientist / Amateur Cook

MadVal, Seattle, WA

Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code

Posted
A macchiato is not supposed to have caramel syrup in it.  :angry:  Other than that I have no opinion on Starbucks.

Nor does it at SB. But if you order a 'caramel macchiato', you're on your own.

Posted
There are only two cases left in Modern English ...

Bless you and your confusion of case and punctuation. Shall we quote the OED and call a draw?

apostrophe 2. The sign (') used to indicate the omission of a letter or letters, as in o'er, thro', can't; and as a sign of the modern English genitive or possessive case, as in boy's, boys', men's, conscience', Moses'.

  In the latter case, it originally marked merely the omission of e in writing, as in fox's, James's, and was equally common in the nominative plural, esp. of proper names and foreign words (as folio's = folioes); it was gradually disused in the latter, and extended to all possessives, even where e had not been previously written, as in man's, children's, conscience' sake. This was not yet established in 1725.

As for your quoting of comparable store names, do you seriously mean to say that you parse 'Starbucks' to mean 'coffee shop owned by the first mate in Moby Dick'?

Posted
This has been raised on another thread but it seems contentious enough to merit a thread of it's own.

While we're on the subject of Mr. Lewis' indiscriminate, if not downright promiscuous use of apostrophes, allow me to point out that "a thread of its own" would have been a trifle less incorrect.

Thank you. I'll be in my glass house if anyone needs me.

Oh, yes, I have a solution to the Starbucks problem: in order to prevent them from profiting by giving millions of people exactly what they want we must pass laws repealing capitalism and prohibiting the use of milk products in coffee beverages. They did that in Lithuania in the 50s, and sales of double-grande decaff cocoanut espressos skyrocketed.

--

ID

--

Posted
Oh, yes, I have a solution to the Starbucks problem: in order to prevent them from profiting by giving millions of people exactly what they want we must pass laws repealing capitalism and prohibiting the use of milk products in coffee beverages.

:biggrin::biggrin: Da, comrade!

P.S. You haven't been around much lately. Working on the history? Arranging information, disinformation and materiel? Or just another tawdtry affair?

Margaret McArthur

"Take it easy, but take it."

Studs Terkel

1912-2008

A sensational tennis blog from freakyfrites

margaretmcarthur.com

Posted

P.S. You haven't been around much lately.  Working on the history? Arranging information, disinformation and materiel?  Or just another tawdry affair?

Yes.

--

ID

--

Posted
There are only two cases left in Modern English ...

Bless you and your confusion of case and punctuation.

I stand blessed dear, but not confused. I was quoting the excitingly bearded David Crystal's Cambridge Encylopedia of the English Language. Perhaps you should write him a stern letter.

do you seriously mean to say that you parse 'Starbucks' to mean 'coffee shop owned by the first mate in Moby Dick'?

Was he the one who could tie a knot in it?

P.S. I do however concede that you are the clever one of eGullet (or should that be eGullet's clever one?)

Posted
There are only two cases left in Modern English ...

Bless you and your confusion of case and punctuation.

I stand blessed dear, but not confused.

I'm not going to argue this point as you're not actually wrong. All I meant was, while a word may be in the genitive case, the apostrophe that makes it so is more usually described as 'possessive'.

P.S. I do however concede that you are the clever one of eGullet (or should that be eGullet's clever one?)

Not true, as I can't work out how I'm being insulted here.

Posted

As always you can rely on the simpsons for a quality cultural comment.

A personal favourite is an episode set in a mall where as the episode progresses the stores gradually all become starbucks, until there's only one free store left with the banner across the window 'coming soon-starbucks'.

i don't have a problem with starbucks, as seems to be the concensus, yes there's better available but they are very convenient. Though you metropolis dwellers may spare a thought for us country bumpkins, if i need to feed my addiction, it's a 10 minute drive to the nearest starbucks!

gary

you don't win friends with salad

Posted
A macchiato is not supposed to have caramel syrup in it.  :angry:  Other than that I have no opinion on Starbucks.

some snarky jive hipster at a cool coffee shop on the upper west side tried to humiliate me last year when i ordered a ralph macchiato. he said, "Oh, watch the Karate Kid much? it's called a MOCkiato."

ha, ha, HA. another underemployed ivey league graduate.

Posted
A macchiato is not supposed to have caramel syrup in it.  :angry:   Other than that I have no opinion on Starbucks.

Nor does it at SB. But if you order a 'caramel macchiato', you're on your own.

Right, but thats what they give you if you order a macchiato. Its to the point now that when you go to "regular" coffee houses and order a macchiato, the barista says, "Now, you know ours don't have caramel in them, right?"

Posted
Right, but thats what they give you if you order a macchiato.  Its to the point now that when you go to "regular" coffee houses and order a macchiato, the barista says, "Now, you know ours don't have caramel in them, right?"

I don't know what happens over there, but if I go into Starbucks in the UK and order a macchiato, I get a macchiato.

Posted
I don't know what happens over there, but if I go into Starbucks in the UK and order a macchiato, I get a macchiato.

You are a fortunate man.

Normal espresso macchiato is on the menu over there too. Maybe they look at you and decide that's not what you're after :biggrin:

Posted

Starbucks coffee mogul Howard Schultz sat down at the table next to me while I was having lunch today at Shanghai Garden, in Seattle's Int'l District. He leaned over to check out my food, and we exchanged hellos. He then ordered some of what I was having. Good man.

×
×
  • Create New...